I kinda found myself asking more questions on that nervous shock question than answered...i knew the case law, but i was unsure as to how to tackle it...i found myself making a circular agrument...lets just hope he likes circles!!!
On Apr 6, 6:10 pm, aviationhead <[email protected]> wrote: > As for Q8, I did exactly the same. Talked a little at the beginning > about the general duties in employers liability, i.e. provision of > competent staff etc and then spent most of the time on Vic Liability. > I also briefly mentioned at the end re what could happen to the > employee and would Rosarie have any contribution to the negligence > (Probo not relevant but made the answer longer!!) > > As for Nervous Shock, I thought he was a little sly in that one, > telling us that John was negligent in connecting the power system. > That threw me at first so I just mentioned again bout emp/vic > liability and then went into the usual Nervous Shock issues, O'Brien, > Alcock, Mullally, Kelly, Curran (Primary Vic) et al... > > As for Q4: I take it that it was pretty much on Occupiers Liability, > again with some other smaller issues coming from Treapass, Concurrent > wrongdoers etc? > > And I take it that Q7 was pretty much a Trespass to the person > question with a few other issues put in for good measure? > > On Apr 6, 5:40 pm, 8th Timer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > How yis, > > > I did that last question as a vicarious liabilty question, was he > > outside the course of employment when giving the lift...you were only > > asked to advise his employers so i presume if he was outside the > > course of his employment we didn't need to discuss any personal > > liability for the problem?? Any other views out there on this one, how > > did ye approach the psych shock question, seeing as we had to advise > > the employer in that as well did ye put in a bit about vicarious > > liability in that? > > > On Apr 6, 5:26 pm, b05bf1e4 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > One more question, how did you tackle the last problem question, the > > > one with Roserie and her installation... > > > > On Apr 6, 4:49 pm, aviationhead <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Guys! > > > > > What did you think of the Tort paper today? > > > > > I thought It was ok. I answered Q2, 4, 6, 7 and 8. > > > > > The problem questions were quite busy but they were on the usual > > > > topics so at least he didnt do an EU on us!!!- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FE-1 Study Group" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.ie/group/FE-1-Study-Group?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
